The Mayoral Race

Nov. 7, 2007

Traverse City is a hotspot for tourism and possesses what the majority of Americans crave:living, breathing downtown with sandy beaches, parks and bike paths, and a strong sense of unity. Yet while the outlying areas have grown in population, Traverse City’s has stayed the same and aged a bit. To be precise, there were 11.2% fewer children in Traverse City in the 2000 census compared to 1990. That contrasts with Grand Traverse County, which saw a mirror 12.4% increase of youth. And now “for sale” signs are sprouting on city streets. “There are more than twice as many properties for sale as normal. It’s shocking,” said Jack Lane, host of WTCM’s Ask the Real Estate Guy. Lane said property sales are high because of the huge inventory.
The election this Tuesday for mayor and city commissioners is made even more interesting, given the disconnect last year over a proposed $13 million parking deck by an out-of-town developer, Federated Properties. With the exception of Deni Scrudato, the city commissioners supported the project and voted to spend $150,000 on a blueprint before the referendum vote to tighten the cost estimate. Yet 71% of voters said “no” to putting the city’s full faith and credit on a bond sale.
On Tuesday, voters will choose between a slate of candidates with the motto “We Listen” against incumbents. Leading that slate is Michael Estes, who is running against incumbent Linda Smyka for mayor.
Estes, with an MBA from Western Michigan University, worked at Ford Motor Company before opening his own investment firm. He is semi-retired. Smyka, a graduate of University of Michigan, worked in personnel management prior to raising four children, now adults. She’s spent 18 years in public office, starting with the planning commission. She was appointed mayor in 2000, then elected in 2003 and 2005.
Interviewed separately, here’s what Smyka and Estes had to say on the town’s hottest topics.

>> On E-coli and last summer’s beach closings:

Smyka: The Watershed Center (which was already working with the commission on storm water outlets) has just begun studying the situation. They are going to be looking at a variety of possibilities. What they would like to do is pinpoint where the E-coli may be coming from. If it is from an overabundance of geese, they can be trained not to be there. Actually other cities have hired border collies, because of their herding instinct to move the geese away from the beach. Once the geese are moved, they don’t return.

Estes: What has happened in recent years, is we’ve done a lot more testing. The result is we’re seeing unusual levels. What’s causing them? Part of it may be caused by run-off issues, especially with the lake at very low levels. It could be the bird populations, the animals by the beach, people dumping off stuff from their boats. I talked to John Nelson (Watershed Center baykeeper) on this issue, and he doesn’t seem alarmed. The Watershed Center is studying it, but we can’t jump to any conclusions. Yet we have to figure out how to improve it.

>> On the summer boat flotilla versus swimmers:

Smyka: We need to continue to work with that. We obviously have to find a balance, and that’s not going to be easy. Especially with gas prices, there are not that many people taking their boat out – they’re anchoring them once they come out of the marina. That’s something the city will grapple with with the help of the studies from the Watershed Center. It’s not just confined to E-coli; it’s understanding the effect of having a concentration of people, geese, in a particular area, and what effect that has on the water and surrounding area.

Estes: It’s a serious problem. Number one, the boats are a problem for people who swim. I know the commission will get grief from boaters, but that’s too bad. I want to make sure I’m protecting people. We need to push them back along the beach. They can do it with simple ropes. Is it really our responsibility to provide free boat slips for people?
It would help if the DDA would do something to cooperate on the bathroom situation by providing facilities with some of its funds - not only bathrooms for visitors by car, but visitors by boat. I’m not prepared to say the boats are the cause of E-coli problems, but when you’re talking about people who anchor the boat, whether it’s for a day or multi-days, it’s a public safety issue.

>> (For Smyka): Thoughts on the Feder-ated Properties Parking Deck–if you had it to do over again?

Smyka: After the voters approved the Hardy parking deck, I believed the voters understood the need for parking downtown. Yet in the aftermath of the Federated proposal, one of the largest percentages in the (post-survey breakdown) is that people didn’t feel we demonstrated a need for a parking deck. I believed the commission proceeded and asked the questions that needed to be asked, tried to be as thorough as possible.
I look at this as an ongoing dialogue. We worked on this, the city staff worked on this, we proposed it to the public, and the public said no. Certainly after that vote, the commission did not proceed in any additional effort in that regard; a lot of commissioners believed that there were a variety of reasons for the failure of the bond vote, and that it was very hard to pinpoint any one thing.

>> Opinions on the proposed Old Towne Parking Deck?

Smyka: We have an opportunity with a local business that would like to grow. Accommodating Hagerty Insurance, whose employees have a median income of $50,000, would be a huge bonus for the city. We’d love to see the money re-circulated throughout the city. This is the very beginning of discussions, and a lot needs to be worked out, but we can work to accommodate existing businesses,
and also the future needs of businesses in the vicinity.

Estes: As we approach this new one, we have to learn lessons from the Hardy deck, which was approved, versus the Federated parking deck which voters overwhelmingly rejected. Number one, the Hardy deck is freestanding. The Federated deck had a private developer building on top of their deck. It created a huge disadvantage for every other developer because they would have gained four floors of scenic views using taxpayer money. The project wouldn’t go without the deck underneath it, and I’m not sure if the city should be responsible for a project built on top of a parking deck. That’s a huge potential for liability.
With the Hardy deck, we dealt with an owner who had had a longstanding relationship with the city – Ross Biedermann – and in the other, with someone nobody knew. His financial track record was very sketchy. Also, I would say that with the Old Towne deck, a majority of spaces at minimum would have to be available to the public.

>> On the city manager and DDA executive director: Too much power, or just enough?

Smyka: These are professional managers. These are folks we hired to do that job. The decisions may appear to the public as behind the scenes, but one of the problems is that our study sessions are not televised, so often folks who follow what the city commission is doing don’t realize that discussions with commissioners took place at public study sessions. That is going to change, because our study sessions will be televised. That will fill in gaps. In addition, the DDA board meetings and all advisory boards will be televised. This will clarify a lot of questions.

Estes: By charter, the answer is no. But what has evolved is you have a city manager that is getting very little direction from the city commission, and so the city manager and the city staff have taken on more responsibility and more authority than they should have. Any important decision should be made by the city commission, and it’s not happening. Incochee Woods is a perfect example. The developer went to city staff, got the okay, proceeded, and this issue was totally unknown to some of the people on the commission, and all of a sudden, the neighbors are very upset. To stop the development, they have to sue the city, the city has to spend $300,000 to resolve the issue, and everyone loses. It’s terrible. That issue should have been decided by the commission and not by staff.
And then there’s the whole issue of the development of Federated, how they conceived the whole project coming down. It was put together behind the scenes, by Bryan (Crough, the DDA executive director) and the city engineers and the city manager, and they put together a package to sell to the city commission. The commission should have been informed immediately what was going on. Then we learn a letter was sent to the city manager with a cheaper alternative and that the city commission would never have found out about it except for an article in the newspaper. You know that something is really wrong when that happens.

>> On taxes: are they too high?

Smyka: The city commission has discussed taxes at length - for more than three years - ever since we’ve had the administrative fee. We’ve wanted to remove that administrative fee and reduce the cost of the entry – meaning moving into Traverse City as a resident or a business. It’s one of the reasons we formed the citizens committee to see if we can reduce those taxes. The committee will take a tough look at our budget, and will look at our budget from the services we provide to how we operate in terms of personnel. We have an opportunity where we can completely restructure government, and other communities have done this with the results of this kind of study. It will take about a year, but some of the members of this committee say they are eager to begin and would like to finish in less than a year. There is talk on the commission to see what’s available for the budget cycle in this year or next to incorporate the low-hanging fruit (the easy items to cut).
Yet part of Traverse City being a desirable place to live is the services we provide; we have 117 miles of streets and alleys that we plow, and 78 miles of sidewalks that we maintain and plow. We have over 20 parks that we oversee and they need play structures maintained, grass cut, beaches combed - sometimes we don’t think about it. We do want input on the budget process; it’s very, very lengthy, and we don’t adopt it until the first meeting in June. As far I’m concerned, I believe Traverse City is a Cool City (www.coolcities.com) because of the vision contained in the current master plan, and all the hard work to make that vision a reality. We have a robust downtown that has grown residents, jobs and businesses within the city limits to help share the load of taxes and to continue its vibrancy. We have a lot of great plans for the bayfront thanks to the Bay Front Initiative, and we’re going to want to fund those. Because it’s part of the TIF district, we can use some of the TIF fund to leverage funds to get state and federal grants. Waterfront grants are very appealing right now to a variety of groups. So we have a lot of opportunity – but we need to keep building on the momentum.

Estes: The taxes are god-awful. The population in 1970 was 14,500, and it’s the same today. People are just not jumping to move here. The millage rate in Traverse City is 13.5 mills, and in Garfield, it’s 4.7 mills. The difference is, we have sidewalks, you get them cleared in the core of downtown, we have leaf pick-up, we have more parks. We certainly have very nice areas that people want to live in, but look at the south end of town. Those home values are not increasing in price. Taxes are a huge deterrent, not only for residential property, but also for business. A perfect example is the Copper Ridge development. Just for the landlord to pay the tax portion in Garfield Township requires $2 per square foot. In Traverse City, it requires $6 per square foot. A developer or a landlord is immediately at a $4 per square foot disadvantage to rent property.
One thing you have to understand is I can’t do anything alone. I’d have to convince a lot of people, but if we could do a 15% tax cut, that would be huge. Part of it is we pay excessive compensation packages to too many people. In the city of TC, which is only about 8 square miles, we have the state police post, the county sheriff’s department, and the city police. Our cost of providing police service shouldn’t be any more than Garfield, which has 16,500 versus 14,500 thousand people. The police budget in Traverse City is $3.5 million (2004, most recent data). In Garfield it’s $700,000. It’s literally 5 times as much. That’s police only. In Garfield Township, the sheriff’s department assigns deputies to patrol the township, so their assignment staff is 12. Traverse City’s is 35. People don’t believe it when I tell them. Their jaws drop. Someone’s gotta justify an expense that’s five times as much. There’s a lot of explaining to do.
The fire department is three to one. Garfield has allocated $1 million; the city’s fire budget is $3 million. In terms of solutions, there are a whole lot of solutions. Why can’t we work with Garfield to consolidate services on a regional basis, and if it works, then extend it to other townships so we’re on the same page? Pension plans are another huge issue. If you work for the city, you all have a similar plan. If you’re 55 and work for 25 years, you get two-thirds of your salary for the rest of your life, adjusted for inflation. Plus you get partial medical benefits. It’s not unusual to live until 80, so that’s 20 years of having to support somebody.
You can‘t do this overnight. You’re talking about putting a freeze on hiring, don’t replace people as they leave. Try to fit people in other places. The deputy question has to be solved through a long-range plan and contract negotiations. I’m not sure about taking swipes of hourly wages, but let’s look at benefit packages. Retirement and medical are excessive, based on what the average person in this community receives. Munson really has virtually nothing for retirement planning. When people leave, they get no medical benefits. Cutting taxes is the hardest thing in the world; but one thing we’ll be assured of. If we keep the present city commission, taxes are going to go up. My emphasis is to make sure they don’t and return whatever we can to property owners.

>> On sprucing up tired looking areas:

Smyka: This commission has created a number of blight ordinances to address areas of the city that look a little rough. We’ve been committed to that. This commission has been focusing on the outlying commercial areas and increased our contract with the Economic Development Corporation to look at those areas through the Chamber. We mapped out a Neighborhood Enterprise Zone in the Depot area, Eighth Street, and Fourteenth Street, which provides for a slight break in taxes, for residential properties that are renovated (property owners need to individually apply).
Estes: The DDA does a fine job in providing a development plan for downtown. Somehow we have to extend that plan throughout all the business sections in Traverse City. That’s a real problem. There’s been no looking at how to develop Division, Eighth Street, Garfield and Fourteenth.

>> On Granny flats – A proposal to increase the number of add-on apartments by about 50 each year

Smyka: It will take on a whole new level of interest at the city commission level. I’m open to hearing how the discussion goes, and looking at potential amendments to the current ordinance or look into a different direction. But applying a different ordinance on every block would create a bureaucratic nightmare. If this 1% increase doesn’t hold, maybe we could look at a pilot area that allows the ADUs to see what happens.

Estes: I’m against it. It’s a controversial issue that divides people. I don’t see why you want to divide people in this city for the sake of adding 100 to 150 people in a three-year period. It’s not logical. We already have a host of rental units through this town; I don’t see any lack of housing right now. Granny flats are not even affordable housing, not with the modifications required under this ordinance – you’d have to charge way in excess of $600 to cover your costs: renovating the garage with bathroom facilities, upgrading wiring, fire prevention. If the city didn’t have enough space for people to live, I’d say okay, but I’m not seeing that.

>> Other thoughts?

Smyka: One of the things we need to work on is we need to build the trust of city government. There has been a lot that’s occurred that doesn’t necessarily relate to city government that creates a shadow on city government. Having the advisory meetings televised will probably change the tone of those meetings, will be very helpful to the citizenry understanding on why we move in a particular direction. I think incorporating the recommendations from the Bay Front Initiative will be a good step in terms of residents seeing the benefit of TIF.

Estes: The number one issue is to get people in every section of town to all start working together so we’re one city to solve all our problems, not just the downtown – I want the downtown to cooperate with the neighborhoods, and the neighborhoods to start working with downtown.

>> Comments on your opponent?

Smyka: It’s important when you consider the mayoral position, to have experience. I’ve had 20 years of involvement with the community. But when someone comes forward and says taxes are too high, the Federated Property should never have been, but has never been involved in either of those projects until now, it leads one to question: What can the commitment be in terms of the future?

Estes: She’s a nice lady. I just think I’m better qualified to approach some of the serious issues that we face.